 |
|
|
|
Michael
( author )
( series )
Supreme Commander & Tyrant for Life
That sounds like work.
|
I had said I would wait until week two, and then some jack ass compared this movie called "Star Trek" to Wrath of Kahn and the time line stretch to 3 weeks.
However, a buddy of my mine came into town to see Wolverine, (which was awesome) and we decided to make it a 2fer.
We saw this movie called "Star Trek" first, and then Wolverine. That was his call, (not a Star Trek fan) and the smart move. I actually ended the evening having enjoyed myself, and my initial annoyance a distant stain of memory.
First the good.
1) This movie is gorgeous. The effects are amazing and wonderful.
2) The casting is solid. All of the actors chosen for their roles are superb.
3) The direction and pacing are excellent, and the only break in the pacing was the completely sideways jaunt to the froze planet when I decided to go to the bathroom for 10 minutes and missed nothing.
Now the bad.
I will always maintain and argue that the Star Trek continuity is the source of great storytelling, and no hinderance to it. Whenever any would be smart ass decides to screw with continuity it is the sure sign that they don't understand Star Trek and their best efforts will be awful.
I'm looking at you Brannon Braga.
Further, rebooting, retelling, recompiling, rearranging and any other euphimism for chucking out the baby with the bathwater is the halmark of lazy bad writers.
I'm still looking at you Brannon Braga.
There are plenty of great alt Trek stories and series, variations on the Theme, be they rearrangement of canon series or original crew series. However, they almost always keep to the core reality and the fundamentals that made that reality great. Sure, suddenly Spock and Kirk are gay lovers, but they are still Kirk and Spock as gay lovers.
This is a movie called "Star Trek", it is not a Star Trek movie.
Time travel plot lines are always a bad idea, no matter how well intentioned or well executed.
I'll have more later.
[Note: This message was edited by Michael. 05/09/2009 01:30]
|
|
|
Michael
( author )
( series )
Supreme Commander & Tyrant for Life
That sounds like work.
|
The Star Trek canon is a very big place, (Hitchhiker's Guide big), there are decades of story telling that have gone untold for all the major characters.
Any writer that tells you they can't possibly tell a story in the Star Trek universe without "rebooting" is a lazy asshole.
From the perspective of forcing all of these characters together for a "first mission", well then its a parody. That much contrived convenience forces a parody.
This is the New Coke of Star Trek, a parody of the original series crammed into 2 hours for those movie executives who can't overcome the worry that just another Star Trek movie will keep away their coveted mainstream. They wouldn't want their audience to be known as nerds.
HINT HINT Star Trek went mainstream over 20 years ago.
The Ugly
With a great cast, wonderful effects and terrific direction the cardinal sins are painfully amplified.
The reboot or origins retelling is a classic, more often used for comedic effect (Stargate goes to this well often, though I contend that Stargate is more a parody show of other science fiction shows itself.) but at the end of the episode, we always hit the reset button and go back.
You cannot convince me that James Tiberius Kirk would be comfortable with allowing history to stay altered in such a ridiculous manner.
From a writing perspective our juvenile writer breaks every rule of Star Trek fan fiction. (This breakdown might contain sideway crankiness that could be considered spoilers, so highlight the text to see my list of crimes.)
1) Time travel causes a change that makes comfortable, familiar characters slightly different. (but not to much, cause that would alienate the general audience who have never actually seen a Star Trek episode and only know these characterizations from the widely portrayed stereotypes that get trotted out to humiliate anyone that self identifies as a fan.)
2) Our troubled hero (who is obviously troubled, did we say he was troubled?) overcomes tremendous odds with little effort and makes a joke out of the hard work and effort that the other characters put into their careers. This happens for no other reason than he is the hero. (Or maybe a GENIUS! Because we all know that being really smart is the sure fired way to be a hero, just remember how every member of MENSA is secretly saving the world by solving difficult word puzzles.) (While we would not watch a boring character plod though reality, the crimes of MARY SUE still hold.)
3) An invincible enemy, who is incredibly invincible, threatens the whole freaking galaxy with some poorly thought out or to difficult to bother to explain, but conveniently contrived, plot device that makes him scary, but human (but also alien)
4) Our hero is the only person that can stop our invincible enemy, and instead of being forced to live through a long career of hard work, experience and courage that builds them into a strong, understanding, competent command officer that can make intelligent life and death decisions on the fly, they ditch all that and get straight to saving the galaxy with their guts. (This is, of course, because knowing that our hero had earned experience with the struggles of a long career in command in order to get to the point where they would even be useful would only burden our poor audience with unnecessary background.)
5) The starship in question is so shiny brand new they are still putting her together as they charge out to save the galaxy.
6) In addition to our wet behind the ears Captain Hero, everyone on board, except the token experienced officer that everyone ignores, is a brand new cadet! They are all geniuses and have also skipped long careers that bring experience and usefulness in order to rush out and save the galaxy.
I'd like to hammer home the last two points.
A brand new, state of the art, flagship of the dominant binding society is rushed into service before its christened and crewed exclusively with cadets that haven't graduated yet.
This is a not a training mission where shit goes down, they are assigned with the full knowledge that they are pretty much worthless. A death sentence. Is it any wonder they put all the cadets in red?
7) The top brass at the military organization are all idiots and sent the entire defense fleet on some mission somewhere else, where they are useless and can't possibly be helpful or be contacted in a way that might interfere with our newbie crews wide ambitions and saving the galaxy with their guts! (Naturally, a galaxy spanning dominant binding society would never have more than one disaster, natural or otherwise, at the same time, right? That never ever happens.)
8) A planet is attacked, no no, a charter member of the dominant binding society, and of course, they have no defenses at all, and are useless.
9) We meet our villain and instead of being blown out of the sky because of the obvious threat, they are allowed to live and be sneaky, despite being so totally outmatch as to be ludicrous. Even after discovering the sneakiness, the villain is over confident and ignore our hero.
10) Despite spending a least a day traveling in the wrong direction in a ship that is quite literally one thousand times slower than the enemy, our hero manages to change course and catch up to the enemy just in time!!! With their guts!
11) ... I really could go on and on.
I won't even bother to go into the many many technology and techno-bable problems that this movie suffers from. (While lacking in techno-babble, failing to explain the ridiculous is also no excuse.)
|
Had this been a classic Trek episode where they hit the reset button, all would have been forgiven, but this is the New Coke reality of Star Trek now.
I enjoyed many moments, just before getting kicked in the crotch with some horrible horrible story telling.
I'm sure the movie will make enough money to warrant a sequel. Hell, they squeezed 7 years out of Voyager and 4 out of Enterprise, and this was actually better than both.
However, they were also Star Trek in name only and drawn out parodies retelling the same damn stories over and over with minor and pointless changes.
A great many people will see this movie and scratch their head wondering what the fuss is about. They will enjoy it in their vacuum of knowledge having been kept safe from back story, character development and ya know, a story that makes any fucking sense.
This is a website for Star Trek writers. I am proud of this communtiy and the many wonderful stories and characters it has generated and promoted.
What do you think?
Remember, we all agree the movie was gorgeous, the cast was wonderful and we all enjoy seeing some version of the Enterprise shoot through space.
As simple fans, it doesn't take much to make us happy. However, as Star Trek writers, we deserve to be more attentive, more for our own efforts and the care we contribute to this universe.
This movie called "Star Trek" has fundementally altered the reality we have chosen to play in.
What do you think?
[Note: This message was edited by Michael. 05/09/2009 11:11]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
( author )
( series )
Supreme Commander & Tyrant for Life
That sounds like work.
|
Ah, there was one more insight.
This regards the contention that Star Trek suffers franchise fatigue and that a reboot was inevitable.
Uh, no.
The vast wealth of Star Trek fan fiction is testament to the contrary, and there in lies my greatest accusation of laziness.
Every story suffers when it is not true to itself. We spot the fake.
Star Trek is at its best when it embraces its back story, and builds from it. It is at its strongest when it is true to the characters.
This movie called "Star Trek" is neither.
In a weak attempt to have the cake and eat it to, it compromised the core of this universe.
Either be a reboot that shows the rearranged origins of these characters,
(Marvel and DC do this all the time, and every comic book movie made is essentially such a story.)
or
be a continuation of the old story, a new mission in the middle of continuity.
The new Battlestar Galactica was regularly thrown out as an example of a reboot that was superior than the original. I loved the first two seasons of BSG.
Now be fair, the original Galactica had so little to offer outside of the premise and some awesome character names.
You can't be both. You cannot serve two masters.
[Note: This message was edited by Michael. 05/09/2009 11:21]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Galen4
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
Well, I just saw it today.
Be warned: there are plenty of SPOILERS in this post; so enter at your own risk.
I’m more or less in agreement with Michael…I loved the production design. The acting was solid and the action sequences were breathtaking. It was nice to see Trek finally done with the scope of a major motion picture, rather than a glorified episode.
To be perfectly honest, I enjoyed it on a superficial level.
My problem is: all of this could have been accomplished without deliberately throwing out over 30 years of continuity. The fact that Abrams went out of his way in taking this approach shows a fundamental lack of understanding (And respect) about the franchise and what made it popular in the first place.
I’ve said this before, but it’s worth repeating: ST did not need to be “rebooted” or “reimagined” or “retooled” in order to be successful again. This notion is a figment of people’s imaginations. It came about after the last two ST projects failed. (Nemesis and Enterprise.) This left studio executives and some fans scratching their heads. Finally they arrived at the erroneous idea that ST was a tired concept with too much mileage.
The second great myth is that ST is a proprietary franchise “owned” by “hard core” fans. According to this folk tale, potential viewers have been shying away from watching because they don’t know the entire Trek history. Therefore, they’re intimidated into thinking they won’t “get it”.
“What we need, is a Trek film for the rest of us!” The studio heads exclaimed excitedly.
Plot problems and spoilers:
The main plot: flat and unimaginative. Time travel through a black hole made out of red goop, resulting in an altered timeline. Altered timeline? Hey, that sounds familiar…
Supposedly, a supernova destroys Romulus in the current, or “old” timeline. But this was glossed over so quickly; we didn’t get a chance to learn more about the circumstances of this event. A nova is only dangerous if it’s YOUR sun that’s exploding. If it was Romulus’ sun, they would have known in advance, right? Novas don’t happen spontaneously. I could have sworn Spock even said the nova was a danger to the “whole glaxy”, but that wouldn’t make any sense. I’m hoping it was just crack withdrawls.
Seriously…how about a sophisticated Sci Fi story that might produce thought?
The villain: a silly, two-dimensional refugee from Nemesis. You could see him twirling his metaphorical mustache the whole two hours. He lives in a spooky, spiky ship that we’re told is actually just a future mining vessel. The outside looks like it was stolen from Babylon 5, while the interior was cobbled together from old “Alien” sets. (You know, so you can tell they’re evil.)
Finally, we’re led to believe that Spock, (The old Spock that is) just rolls over and accepts the destruction of Vulcan. He decides to help his surviving people settle on another planet to begin the rebuilding of Vulcan society.
I beg your pardon?
This is Spock, after all. The real Spock would move heaven and Earth to restore the timeline as it was. ESPECIALY since trillions of Vulcan lives hang in the balance. In ST, this kind of thing is done all the time. Why would Spock just settle down in the past without even trying? The loss of Vulcan would have a catastrophic affect on future events. Just think about all of those people who were never meant to die…
It’s perplexing that this much effort was made in rewriting ST, for such a thin, cartoonish story. If you’re determined to take a wrecking ball to ST, at least pen something that would make Isaac Asimov proud.
In the end, a good film for people who didn’t like ST to begin with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
( author )
( series )
Supreme Commander & Tyrant for Life
That sounds like work.
|
Well, there is one way of handling this development. It could be considered canon in the way the cartoon series has been handled. They went to a great deal of trouble to headline that this is an altered reality.
I agree with Galen about future Spock. Hmmm... He'll propose time travel in a rusty bucket Klingon Bird of Prey to save the whales but he won't go try the same trick in a shiny new Enterprise to save his own planet and billions of Vulcans?
The Star Trek universe is huge, we've got dozens of methods for instant time travel, with the Guardian of Forever at the top of the list.
As I said, James Tiberius Kirk and Spock of Vulcan would never have allowed this alteration to stand.
These characters are not Kirk and Spock. This was not a Star Trek movie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
usscantabrian
( author )
( series )
Captain
How do I set the laser printer to stun?
|
Well, I have to disagree. I liked it. Okay, there were problems with it, but I thought it was pretty good.
Why? Well, for one, I read the Star Trek: Countdown comics that were the prequel to this movie, and maybe for me, that made more sense.
I'll cover the parts relevant to the movie here, because I think they give more insight into the movie. (In saying this, I believe some of this should have been covered a lot better in the movie instead of glossed over as a part of a mind-meld.) This is off the top of my head, so sorry if I get anything out of sequence.
SPOILERS BELOW
The Romulans (and Federation) knew a supernova was happening in the Hobus star system (which is a neighbouring star system from the Romulus system). Unfortunately, what no one knew was the star, when consuming matter when it was expanding, unleashed some sort of super-supernova, whereby it would continue growing exponentially with the more matter it consumed.
Okay. A bit of a dumb idea because, hey, that's not like that's going to happen. I got the feeling it wasn't a natural occurance, but that's just me.
Nero (a miner and captain of a mining ship) and his crew barely escape the star. They return to Romulus to join Spock -- now the Federation ambassador to Romulus -- on the Senate floor to say the Hobus star now presents a threat to the Romulan Empire. If it keeps expanding, it will continue to destroy further and further out.
Of course, the Romulan Senate poo-poos the idea.
Nero finds out his wife is pregnant with their first child. He leaves Romulus with Spock in an attempt to find help. He tells her he will be back.
Spock knows the Vulcans are experimenting with red matter, decalithium (a rare element) that can create a black hole. So he and Nero (assisted by Captain Data of the Enterprise-E and Ambassador Picard) attempt to convince the Vulcans to help, but they decline, afraid the Romulans will use the red matter as a weapon.
At this point, Spock and Picard stay on Vulcan to keep working hard to convince the Vulcans to change their minds. Nero heads back home, arriving in the Romulan system in time to see the Hobus supernova careen into the system, and destroy Romulus.
Only a handful of Romulans have survived, including the ruling council and the praetor. Nero brings them aboard, with them attempting to convince him he should take them to a top secret Tal'Shiar base equipped for such an emergency... then kills them all for not listening to him. His entire family is dead. Everything he knew is dead and gone.
Historically, Romulans who lose family or friends or loved ones shave their hair off and tattoo tribal marks on their faces and heads. Nero and crew do this.
The Hobus star has grown to a huge threat. Geordi LaForge shows Spock how to use the Jellyfish. Spock takes the Jellyfish on a one-way mission to destroy the Hobus star, thinking that a huge explosion of red matter will suck the star back in on itself through a red matter black hole.
Nero arrives at the secret base. He fills the Tal'Shiar in on his plan, and they grant access for him to augment his ship with Borg technology. The mining ship grows from a normal looking Romulan ship to something extremely sinister: the Narada we see in the movie.
Nero pursues Spock. He believes Spock lied, and therefore is intending to get his revenge on him, then turn his guns on the Federation. But Spock detonates the red matter, collapsing the Hobus star. It sucks the Narada in first, then the Jellyfish.
And there begins the movie.
I think that all kind of helps when watching the movie as it gives a bit of backstory. I thought Nero's motivations, as portrayed in the film, were somewhat weak, but had they shown this -- and I'm led to believe a huge scene at Ruha Penthe was cut from the film -- or explained it a bit better, the film would have made more sense.
Okay, there were a few plotholes, but I thought it was fun all around. I was a bit uncomfortable with the beaming from Delta Vega to Enterprise bit, but, hey, we don't know if Spock Prime used a work-around we haven't seen yet.
What we have to understand is we don't know how the Kelvin's destruction altered the universe. We know how it impacted on Kirk's life, but could it have influenced Spock's? Uhura's? What if there was someone on that ship who touched one of their lives and was killed in the battle against the Narada? This could have spun that reality out of kilter a lot.
I think the main themes in the movie were vengeance affects different people different ways. How did Nero respond to vengeance as opposed to Spock? (They could have played this stronger though.)
Another point is no matter what happens, fate might make things happen a certain way. Kirk lost his father, but he still ended up where he needed to be.
A third point which I heard from someone else, but really should have been driven home (as it wasn't a main point in the movie) was Nero's child versus Kirk. Nero could have been very focused on, "Why did Kirk survive when my own child didn't?"
Another point was Spock's duality (which I thought was portrayed very well). He's trying to be Vulcan, but no matter how hard he tries, he keeps being swat down. I found it ironic that the one who was not Vulcan enough ends up saving the Vulcan High Council and their culture from destruction.
I thought it took balls to do what they did with the Star Trek universe. No reset buttons. No magic fix. That's it. Vulcan's gone. Spock Prime might not be able to get back. Things are very different from where they should be but somehow quite similar.
I felt the actors got their characters spot on.
I didn't feel Uhura was a slut (as some people are saying; doesn't a slut sleep around?) or that it was out of character for her to comfort Spock in the turbolift the way she did because she always seemed to me to be a very loving and caring person. And, with being younger than the Uhura we've seen, this may have been the only way she knew how to express to Spock that she's there for him, that she cares. And, it appears, that Spock took her up on that comfort.
Pine was Kirk and Quinto was Spock and Urban was McCoy. I thought they got them all spot on.
Anyway... this is my opinion. I went with 8 other people, some of whom are Star Trek fans like me, and we all felt it was a good movie.
One good thing we have to agree on... this movie appears to have reset interest in Star Trek. Look at the amount of money this film has made so far!
Hope you are all well,
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
usscantabrian
( author )
( series )
Captain
How do I set the laser printer to stun?
|
Also, I think my response did adress some of Michael's points, but here are a few more...
MORE SPOILERS
Why did the Powers That Be send out cadets to defend Vulcan?
I think that's all that they had left. From what I understood (or maybe read into it), Starfleet sent out everyone they could in ships that might not have been up-to-scratch (i.e. in drydock for repairs) and ships in the area to confront the Narada at Vulcan. There were 7 ships (I think) if I remember correctly.
There was a large fleet confrontation at the Laurenthium (spelling?) system. I kinda got the feeling the fleet was at odds with the Klingons there, but I could be wrong. I would also assume, a la Best of Both Worlds, that there were a lot of ships not in the core systems, but some would be out exploring the big bad darkness on science missions.
Where were Vulcan's defenses?
Two answers to this:
1. The rest of the fleet was slaughtered in minutes. Even the Kelvin didn't last too long. What sort of defenses could resist that kind of onslaught? Orbital satelites could have been blown out of the sky. Remember we're in the mid-23rd century battling a Borg-enhanced late 24th century Romulan ship.
2. I was under the impression the Narada's drill interfered with all sorts of electrical devices, including transporters. Who's to say that it didn't prevent shuttles, etc. from attacking the Narada?
Time travel
I'm of the opinion that a change in one event can have a ripple effect. See my post above.
Anyway... that's my take on things.
Scott :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Code Name D
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
I will also take my preverbal kick at the reboot. And I am mostly in agreement with every one here.
I was a bit fretful with the “shiny tech” look of the ship it self. But just like ST:III:SFS, and ST:IV which proved that one doesn’t need the Enterprise to make a good Star Trek film, this one also proves that same point. But I think he did forget a key element with the original style – its familiarity. The fact that the audience was as familiar with the ship as the crew was actually simplifies the story telling and complements the visual style.
There were a number of things new here worth repeating. The fact that original notions of up and down were thrown out the window for example. The POV was turning upside down, spinning and spinning, made things extremely thrilling. The camera shaking is also new – all through it was probably a bit over used in some places.
The problem is with the notion of “reboot.” Exactly what was meant by this? Now we have a better idea, and I do fear that they have thrown the baby out and kept the bath water.
Star Trek was always known for its smart and serious approach to science fiction. In the 60’s, its contemporaries either came in the form of giant mutant monsters (ant’s wasps, moles, giant man eating gerbils, what have you) or children’s fair, the equivalent of live action cartoons. Star Trek brought into truly intellectual territory where both the characters and heroes had to think, and where the villains weren’t always wrong, or even evil, but just different.
Star Trek had the ability to explore issues where conventional programming wouldn’t even touch on. Maters of war, race, equality, integration, militarism were all used as inspiration. Star Trek was able to brake away from the simplistic three “R” of science fiction: rockets, robots, and ray guns.
This is where the continuity starts to become an asset. Science fiction has a problem in that each new universe must be introduced. Not just the people and the their place in the world, but the worlds them selves, the physics at work around them, the politics, history, culture, technology, every thing, must be defined for the audience. Authors of good science fiction give a lot of attention to how all these points fit together. Bad authors don’t. But what made ST different is that as it matured, you no longer needed to build these things from scratch. You had centuries of history already established, and not just a thumb nail, but a complex and rich history as rich and as nuanced as any thing you might find in a real history book. You have pre-developed cultures that comes complete with art, music, mythology, history, and aesthetics, already waiting for you.
This allows you to build a complexity and sophistication into story telling that would be impossible for any sort of science fiction having to start from scratch. You could expand into new arenas of science fiction, to delve into things like political intrigue, reinterpretation of history (cannon), or cultural interactions, just to name a few. Conventional fiction could never explore these ideas without going overboard into contrived synthetic histories that would prove to be meaningless to the story itself. Which is why smart authors rarely go into these areas.
To give you an example, think of the STDS9 episode, Ways of the Warrior. A story that untimely saw the brake up of the Federation Klingon alliance. It was a tragedy to be sure, and one that any average viewer would surly appreciates, but we watch this very alliance being built. We saw the formation of the Orgiana Treaty itself, and watch as TNG build upon a shaky platform to build a strong alliance. This made the battle over DS9 all the more tragic for the audience.
But of course this takes a different kind of writing, one that you can’t do from the board room at Paramount.
What I think is apparently meant by “reboot” was to strip out that sort of continuity, permitting the sort of overly simplistic sort of action ride science fiction has now become at the movies. This is why the past few TNG movies have failed, as well as Emprise. They were trying to play with toy plains on the deck of an aircraft carrier where the real thing was already at work.
For example, I just bought ST:Nemisies. This one started out with a lot of promise, with the assassination of the entire Romulan Senate. Now this had promise, political intrigue, and power struggles. But it turned into a warmed over version of Search for Spock, with the Enterprise trading shots with a cloaked vessel. With a clone of Pickard of all things, and a Romulan race we had never heard of before. All of the implied potential of the opening sequence just – diapered, displaced by the all too predictable movie ride.
They are surly thinking that the reboot will remove future trek of that sort of baggage. That lazy writing will no longer seem so lazy any more, because we have “rebooted” the whole thing.
I also suspect that politics itself may have a role to play. It can be strongly argued that the original Star Trek appealed to progressive values. It challenged notions of war, of us and those politics, of racial and ideological identity. Some might even claim it went too far. In my own Screaming Rebel, I made the Captain a Catholic, to bring ideas of Christianity back into the sphere where the teachings of Kahless, the Unforgettable are focused on, while Christianity, its clear and blatant counter point doesn’t even seem to get a mention.
I know of several conservative who never enjoyed Star Trek because of its political approach, because it did challenge racial and political identity, ideas that many conservatives openly reject. The new movie reduces Star Trek back down to good guys and bad guys, the notion of diversity. The fact that Vulcan was destroyed was no coincidence, as it removes the diversity anchor for Spock. As he said in the movie; “Earth is now my only home.”
As a progressive my self, these notions are rather overt and blatant. Star Trek now wants to just kill bad buys, not understand them. Romulan’s are no more than “rag heads”, sifi terrorists that exist outside the human plane of moral existence as unreasoning monsters who must be stopped before they can destroy our way of life. And to appeal to the “political center” that is perceived to be the bulk of any potential viewing audience.
I do not think that it will succeed. For one thing, the bulk of the viewing audience is actually progressive. But it’s also my experience that conservatives are not all that simplistic either. Not all conservatives are just red-necks that can be easily distracted by shiny objects and loud explosions. After all, there are a lot of conservative values that were enshrined in Star Trek as well, honor, duty, loyalty, faith, and character. The notions of family and heritage are strongly represented.
The rich tapestry of continuity which is thrown out also dose a disservice to them as well, destroying the rich universe with which to also explore our own place in our own civilization.
Without that, Star Trek will have to compete in an already crowded field of other movie rides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Galen4
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we have to accept that we’re in the minority.
It’s obvious that most of ST fandom no longer cares about continuity.
Sadly, we may be reaching a point where ST undergoes radical surgery every few years, (like the James Bond franchise)----all in an attempt to pander to whatever the current market is at the time.
Ironic…fan fiction and professional novels may be the last haven for what will probably be called the “classic universe.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
( author )
( series )
Supreme Commander & Tyrant for Life
That sounds like work.
|
No offense Scott, its not your story, but I feel that everyone is now dumber for having read that explanation of the comic book back story.
Whatever I might accept about this movie, this story and the future of Star Trek, I refuse to acknowledge that future Spock would resign himself and accept the destruction of his planet and near extinction of his race with such disgrace.
As much as it might annoy us when over used to get out of corners, the reset button is a deep element to Star Trek from the earliest and best stories. (Or maybe try writing stories that make sense and don't need the reset? Huh huh maybe, maybe?)
I realize that bean counting executives have all the cards and own the final rights to this franchise, so as Galen eloquently puts it, we will now be subjected to a never ending rehash, one remake after another pandering to the cultural memory of a franchise called "Star Trek", desperate to squeeze every last dollar out of characters and retelling the same damn story lines.
This movie, while called "Star Trek" is not a Star Trek movie.
It is a dramatic parody, a tribute piece designed to wring every penny out of an American icon.
Now, I'd like to point out again, in different words, this movie has two faces.
It is a JJ Abrams movie and it is a potential installment in the Star Trek franchise.
As a JJ Abrams movie, it is, I believe it is his best work yet, gorgeous, perfectly tuned and magnificently executed.
As a would be Star Trek movie, it is flat, the characters are unimaginative, lifeless caricatures of barely remembered stereotypes, the story is nonsensical at best, and I really didn't give a crap what happened to them at the end.
Save the Earth, don't save the Earth, whatever.
I also threw up in my mouth a little at the Spock/Uhura connection. I mean, OMGWTF?
Just as we washed our hands of STV, and only own it because it came in a box set, I wash my hands of this movie.
This is the Star Trek movie for people who don't like Star Trek. A lobotomized action adventure dressed up in the cherished cultural touchstones of two generations and bled dry for two hours of running and shooting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
usscantabrian
( author )
( series )
Captain
How do I set the laser printer to stun?
|
Okay, first off, I do care about continuity, as do my friends who love Trek and who have seen this movie and liked it. I can't quite understand how liking an alternate reality movie of Star Trek = not giving a toss about continuity. So, Galen, when you say that you are in the "small minority" who care about continuity, I have to argue you are wrong: lots of fans care about continuity. The thing is, some fans are open-minded enough to give this breath of fresh air "rehash"/"reboot"/whatever-you-want-to-call-it a chance.
We have to understand, this is an ALTERNATE REALITY film. Continuity from the prime universe has pretty much nothing to do with this reality now. There is a new continuity in place for this reality, just like the alternate continuities in "Parallels" and some other alternate-reality-based episodes.
Has anyone tried to get on TrekWeb.com after this movie came out? Damn near impossible from all the traffic that site has been taking since the new movie came out.
I've never had that problem before!
Has anyone bothered to check the amount of money this version of Star Trek is raking in? Lots more than any other Star Trek movie recently, that's for sure.
This has two things in its favour:
1. It has reinvigorated the franchise, adding more fans.
2. It means there will be more Star Trek to come.
And since when has Star Trek been super-internally consistent? Enterprise-D first encountered the Borg in 2365 because Q introduced them. No wait. 7 of 9's parents found the Borg long before that, and Starfleet knew about it but decided to do sweet-FA about it. No, sorry. Enterprise encountered them on Earth in the 2150s.
And don't get me started on the Ferengi.
Which one is right? How is that consistent, or in keeping with continuity?
The one that got my goat was Dark Frontier (I think it was called). Janeway was playing with her comm-badge and Chakotay says, "You're worried." Janeway is shocked. "How can you tell?" Chakotay: "You always play with your comm-badge when you're worried."
What? I'd never seen her fiddle with it in the FIVE years prior to this episode.
And Janeway was one of the most inconsistent main characters Star Trek has ever seen. I'm not ragging on Mulgrew -- I thought she did well with the material she was given -- but seriously, anyone that schizophrenic in charge of a starship would worry me if I was in Starfleet!
So consistency and continuity are not always particular strong point of Star Trek anyway.
This film doesn't mean that the original reality (for lack of a better term) doesn't exist, that it was wiped out of existence. It doesn't mean the original continuity no longer exists.
We might not get any stories from the original reality for a while on the big screen, but that's tough biscuits. After seeing Enterprise, Voyager and the last few TNG movies, I'm not really crying, because, to be honest, they were not very good. Nemesis was horrible.
This was a breath of fresh air the franchise needed to get it going again. Hate it or love it, the figures and announcement of a sequel prove that.
And, Michael, I thought the comic story, although rushed and a little bit fan-boyish in places, had heart. It explained why Nero was vengeful. Anyone who has an ounce of emotion and who has lost someone very dear or close to them like I have (and I'm sure everyone has) could easily understand how one could get to that point. Maybe it's the experience of living in another country, far away from home, and thinking about "what if" that made me identify with the story, rushing home to find out it's too late (or nearly too late), which is what I have been through, that resonates in me.
How do you react when life changes so suddenly? When something that is such a large part of you, if not nearly all of you, is ripped away from you, despite everything you have done to stop it, is no longer?
And, again, I think this is the heart of this latest Star Trek. The line between going obsessive like Nero and being more resigned to things like new Spock or being in that grey area like new Kirk was a theme. I don't think (to be honest) they got it down pat, or smacked us over the head with it, but it was pretty good.
Michael, who said that Spock (either incarnation) has accepted Vulcan cannot be restored? What if that was a premise of the next installment of the movies? What if, with time, Spock becomes like Nero: obsessed, almost mad-scientist-like, in getting Vulcan back? What if new Kirk is pitted against Spock (either Spock Prime, new Spock or both) in the attempt to bring Vulcan back? Who would need Khan or any other villain then because the enemy wouldn't be from outside but within the ranks?
Could Spock Prime have grown more mellow in his older age? Maybe believe "give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can change, and the wisdom to distinguish one from the other?"
Spock Prime said he was helping set up a Vulcan colony for the survivors. What if he was omitting the truth, like he has on previous occassions? Maybe he's hatching a plan... who knows?
In short, we don't know... YET. It could be provided in another movie. Maybe it won't. We don't know the turmoil Spock Prime went through because, hey, we only see him for a few minutes on screen.
Everything needs revigoration once in a while; otherwise, it grows stale and is in danger of becoming obsolete. Star Trek desperately needed that, and I think JJ Abrams has given that to the franchise.
The movie had balls, it had heart, it had good character moments. Story had a few problems, but overall, it was entertaining. And it brought more people into the Star Trek fold. Maybe these people will go back, discover how things were different in the original continuity and uncover the rich diversity of Trek lore that has gone before. I know, with different series, I have done that after seeing a "reboot" movie or show.
I think, too, we need to remember the fact that there is about 600 hours worth of canon TV and movie episodes set in the original universe, and 2 hours set in the alternate reality.
Also, this was a 2 hour movie, without the broad canvas a TV show or series of movies has to establish fully-fleshed three-dimensional characters, but with further movies, we may see them. This, for arguement's sake, was a pilot. We'll learn more about the characters in later films or shows, if they come out.
I'm highly doubting anything I'll say will change anyone's mind -- I know one person on another board I visit had already made up his mind that he didn't like the movie before he even set a foot into the theatre, and guess what? Walked out not liking it simply because of his attitude -- but I went in to the movie with an open mind (as had my friends) and we enjoyed it.
To each their own :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
( author )
( series )
Supreme Commander & Tyrant for Life
That sounds like work.
|
Scott,
No one is making the case that liking this movie implies a disregard for continuity or an "us vs them" mentality.
As I have been told repeatedly, it's only a movie/tv show/American icon, whatever belittling thing people say when it isn't vogue to be passionate about... anything.
I have not traveled to any other Star Trek websites, because, frankly, I don't care about Star Trek in that way. I care about the stories and the characters.
Don't even get me started about Brannon Braga. I spent a great deal of time railing against the ignominious problems in DS9, Voy and ENT.
I established the most popular Star Trek fan fiction website on the internet in 1997 to give fan writers a platform for promotion, and have spent over $7200 over 12 years keeping it running, not including the money and prizes I have given away for writing contests.
I have geek cred coming out the wazoo, as do most of the old school authors here, including yourself.
No one is picking sides, but we do have to discuss this and decide how each will proceed.
Our complaints and concerns are not vicarious or ill intentioned.
I spent my $8 bucks at the box office already. I paid for the right to be disappointed.
Now, come on. You contend that a 2 hour movie isn't enough time to get to know these characters. I disagree. Let's see how a classic Star Trek movie in 2009 could begin.
EXTERNAL SCENE: SPACE
We look across a space scape of stars and a dazzling nebula.
PULL BACK TO REVEAL
The USS Enterprise
VOICEOVER:
Captains Log, Stardate something something something. The Enterprise is one route to random planet to conduct a random mission.
CUT TO: Bridge:
KIRK in the Center Chair, Spock at Science, Bones standing behind Kirk ETC
Kirk:
Mr. Spock, what do make of that planetoid beyond?
MR SPOCK LOOKS UP FROM HIS STATION
Spock:
Fascinating Captain, it is a lifeless rock in space.
Bones:
Dammit, Spock, I'm a doctor not a geologist, speak English.
SPOCK RAISES EYEBROW
MR SCOTT WALKS ONTO THE BRIDGE
Scotty:
Captain, she canna take much more of this!
KIRK SMILES AT SCOTTY
Kirk:
Mr Scott, we need warp speed in three minutes or we'll be late for lunch.
END SCENE
So, there you have it, after 5 minutes who ever they have read those lines just established that they were Kirk, Spock, Bones, and Scotty. You can now begin your adventure and avoid a long needless reboot-origins story that disembowels the fundamental basis for our primary character.
Forty Three Years of Star Trek in the main stream means you don't need to bore us with how troubled they are or how rough their childhood was. We already know these people, we grew up with them, they are our friends.
This goes double for the non-fan audience. They don't care how these people met or in what sequence. They want to be entertained, told a fun story and dazzled with shiny baubles.
They want to walk out of the theater shake their head in bemusement, smile and ask "Who wants to get some frosty milkshakes?" taking each step farther away from giving a shit about what they just paid money to see.
My days of speculating about what random PTB will do next have long since hit the sunset. I will not waste my time throwing out ideas that are always better than the ones I pay to watch.
The movie is doing well and reenergizing the franchise. Great.
Now visit these links and try not to gouge your eyes out with the horror that has been born...
KHAN IN STAR TREK SEQUEL?
Javier Bardem as Khan In Star Trek 2?
Star Trek sequel: Kirk vs. Khan round 3?????
"Star Trek" Crew Discuss Possible Sequel
Ya see, its not about new ideas with a rebooting.
Its about telling the same damn stories over and over because you will pay to see them again.
I will watch the DVD I already own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Code Name D
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
I don’t think there is any doubt that Star Trek needs a reboot. Certainly the JJ Abrams gave the franchise a much needed face lift and fresh perspective. But the questions is – is that it? CG is every where now, big whooping deal. Actors are noticing green screens popping up every where. Heck you even find them in romantic comedies with the leads trying to look lonely into each others eyes from two separate continents. Special effects wiz-bang movies are a dime a dozen these days. The only time practical effects are ever used these days seems to be with the porn industry. I am not impressed.
But come on here. Most of us are writers here, and have a fair idea of how stories are put together. This movie suffers from several major maladies:
“Danger behind every door!” – This is classic bad writing, a virtual red flag if ever there was one. It substitutes violence, for conflict. Heck even student Spock had to get into a fight. We had every thing from bar brawls to ice monsters. Some of these action sequences are more contrived than others. Like what one guy said, he went to the bathroom when Kirk landed on the ice planet – and missed nothing. That is a major red flag that you have less filling, and more filler.
Bizarre logic – oh this one was loaded with them. Okay, exactly how dose a mining ship take on a Starship again? Kirk over hears a message from Uhura (while she is undressing of all things), that know one else could decode, about a lighting storm over a Klingon outpost, and I guess remembers the lightning storm from when he was born and puts together that it’s a trap. Oh and this conclusion leapfrogs him from cadet on academic suspension to first officer – who then jumps ship onto the drill platform. Old Spock knows what young Scotty is about to do when it’s impossible in Pickard’s time. (Okay, we are going to beam you onto a star ship, moving at warp 9.8 or something, from a planet that is… um… not moving at all, crossing how many thousands of light years? Black holes are caused by “red mater?” Cadets running about this ship with knowledge on how to do things that more experienced, old fogy officers can’t seem to do on their own. Senior officers suddenly falling dead or getting lost or something, which of course means our intrepid cadets suddenly have to step in and take there, places. Oh and how about the giant glass water pipes with the elevated “escape hatch”, right before the “water blender” which Scotty just happened to beam himself into (opps). (Crushy-chompy things any one? I suppose we should be thankful that Kirk didn’t have to charge through a wall of fire to get to the emergency release.) I could go on. And that’s just the stuff in the movie itself.
Miracle technology. Yep, Scotty saves the day again with something he just happened to be tinkering around with. Then you have the so called “red mater” that creates black holes/time portals, which makes the entire story line possible. Romulans were developing this stuff as a weapon, but weren’t sophisticated enough to use it to save their own planet.
And then you have your simple WTF moments. Like when Uhura thinks that just losing your home planet is a good time to suck-face. Come on! That’s just about as insulting as Jolene Blalock being able to fall on her boobs on cue.
I do not lament the casting aside of continuity per say. Its science fiction after all, planet romance even, why repeat you’re self when you can explore something new. But that’s it, other than the CGI, there is little new here. Same tired old time paradox story, same exchange of cannon fire a broadside, the same disposable one dimensional villain. No, what I lament is the fact that the continuity has about a billion other stories just begging to be told. No……. let’s do a time paradox instead.
Sorry dude. This one is destined for the MST3K inbox.
Did I go into the theater expecting to be disappointed? Hell yay, given that the last three sucked. Of course I did get my hopes up when I red the reviews, only to find out the reviews were not even correct. (Keep in mind that some of the critics have been accused of being paid off for their reviews. Case in point with this one.) I just heard that the local critics for my own paper tanked it for largely the same reasons I just gave you.
Popular? Rule number one is to never believe your own press, and this Kansas boy has seen less spin on an F5.
Sequel? Well hay, if Star Trek Nemeses didn’t kill the franchise, why should any one expect this one too? Lets face it, the bar is set so low that Abrams can practically trip over it.
Yay. Star Trek needs a reboot. Now more than ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Galen4
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
Well, Scott I wanted to echo a previous comment: my strong opinions on this subject are not directed at you, or any other viewer, specifically. I certainly respect your views. Heck, my wife loved this picture. She’s a little baffled as to why I’m making a such a fuss about aspects of it that to her, are no big deal. And she’s a pretty big fan in her own right.
But I wanted to address a few points.
I like that you’ve taken such an optimistic approach concerning the continuity changes. However, the events in this film are intended to replace the existing timeline. It is not a “parallel” reality in the sense that both universes exist separately. Remember, ST follows the “Back to the Future” rule of time travel----which means that altering events can completely change a single time line.
At least, that was the intent of the story. We can dismiss this any number of ways, if we choose. Parallel universes are firmly established in Trek, so who’s to say the classic timeline is really lost? Also, the Federation has agencies that protect against temporal changes, not the least of which is probably Section 31. This has been suggested by Voyager and DS9, and makes sense, considering the rampant time shenanigans that are always going on. It follows therefore, that even if Spock Prime makes no effort to fix things (Implausible and inconsistent as that would be for this character,) some other person or agency would step up to the plate. Sooner or later (If you’ll excuse the unintended pun) the classic reality would be resurrected.
Thinking of this as an “Imaginary” or “alternate” universe would certainly make the movie more palatable to me. But again, I should point out that Abrams and his team intended to erase the previous history by making profound and sweeping changes. (Such as wiping out Vulcan.)
Concerning my accusation that most fans today don’t give a hoot about continuity, well, the evidence sort of speaks for itself. Most people are onboard with this version. I’ve heard few protests over abandoning the previous history. The focus then, is on the instant gratification created by today’s movie. The deeper satisfaction, which comes from adding another piece to the ST landscape, has been obscured by the glare of CGI fireworks and video game action.
This may sound hypocritical, but I actually enjoyed the film. There was much of it I liked. But on a superficial level. It’s not something that I can reconcile with ST.
And some food for thought: I’ve seen comments from viewers that say “Boy, I was never a ST fan before, but NOW I am!”
The question then becomes; what exactly are they a fan of? Think about it…they found nothing of value in the five different series and ten separate feature films over the course of forty years.
But NOW they like it. That speaks to the direction we’re headed in.
Prediction: A few sequels down the road (After Abrams’ love spell wears off) fans may be in for a rude awakening. By then, ST will have completed its transformation into a quasi-Star Wars/Babylon 5 hybrid.
Any hoo, I’ve more than said my piece.
Scott: Thanks for continuing to share your thoughts.
[Note: This message was edited by Michael. 05/14/2009 10:46]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Highlander
( author )
( series )
Promenade Guru
The problem is God gave me a penis and a brain, but only enough blood to work one at a time.
|
I know you guys are in the midst of a discussion so I will just chime in with my thoughts separate from the discussion.... I know you guys are in the midst of a discussion so I will just chime in with my thoughts separate from the discussion....
Let me say first – I liked the movie. Not in my top 3 Trek, well possibly not even my top 5 Trek movies but I would have to give that some thought. I did enjoy it, but as a purest I found myself having to shut off my brain to make it work.
What I didn’t like:
1. I would have suspected Spock would have discussed going through the process of rebuilding the red matter ship to reset the time line. Even if as a throw away line. Made him a bit week.
2. Spock at the end started saying the lines of the bridge crew as if to imply to the audience “Hey this is part of memory now, I know it was supposed to happen this way..” Um problem, The younger Spock didn’t walk onto the bridge until five minutes into the bridge crew lines. So how did he know them? Just one of those lol moments.
3. Spock and Uhura relationship didn’t do anything for me.
4. Time travel involved….. AGAIN
5. Spock saying the Supernova threatened the galaxy with no other explanation? We know now that novas can effect several stars and whatever Planets they may have (nothing visual, just basic mathematical calculations) but an entire galaxy? Come on.
6. Cadets taking over the bridge at the end? What the hell? Why couldn’t they have given the ship the Kirk by Pike’s request and then have Kirk say “I get to pick my crew” – that would have been so freaking classic Kirk and would have made the story line believable.
I laughed at the end for two reasons. The first was I was actually impressed that we weren’t insulted with a “ok everything is fixed now and the timeline goes on as if nothing happened” ala Voyager. The second was the obligatory “we’re doing this so we can do whatever we want in the next movie and not have to hear it from the purest.”
Despite the fact that this post focused on what I didn’t like I hope I made myself clear that I still enjoyed the movie not to let anything really bother me. I even got a kick out of seeing the animal on the alien planet. Shows the galaxy is not so cut and dry as Trek has led us to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
usscantabrian
( author )
( series )
Captain
How do I set the laser printer to stun?
|
Hey again, guys,
Just to respond to some points made:
Michael: I understand where you're coming from. And by no means am I trying to have a pissing contest with anyone. I felt some of the "growing up" scenes (well, the driving-off-the-cliff-in-Iowa? scene specifically) were superfluous. But they were attempting to balance the difference between a young Kirk and young Spock, and I guess this was the best way they could do this.
But... I think a quick introduction wouldn't've worked so well. I'm not sure. I would have to think about it more. Maybe even see the movie again.
What I am saying is this: If you only had one Star Trek movie, without any established canon, how much backhistory would you be able to cram into it? I think the approach JJ and Co made was introduce the audience to these characters as if they didn't know anything about them. And, I think they handled that well, while still kind of pandering to the hardcore Trekkies (like the fat chick in the Voyager jacket sitting behind me at the theatre... I'll add a funny story at the end of this which hopefully everyone will love, whether they liked the movie or not!)
Now, you as well as I know, Michael, about speculation being rife on the Internet. I mean, how many people did we hear say, "I bet Shatner appears in this film as a cameo." He didn't. The internet is a big bad ol rumour machine. And as for Khan being in the next film? Roberto Orci, one of the writers of the film, was asked the sequel question.
"Q: There's been reports over the interweb that you've both been asked to start writing a sequel, which I think is fantastic news if it's true, where do you see this going, JJ Abrams said there is a whole new world that can be created, is it more likely to create something completely new or do you look back at the canon and see where you can intersperse that into canon that you are creating?
"Orci: We literally haven't sat down to talk about it, we just finished the movie two weeks ago and we're trying to let it wash over us and see what people like yourself think and see how the audiences respond to the first movie and base it on that cause again Star Trek isn't something we created it's something that all of us have taken care of and we want fan opinion before we commit to anything." [http://trekweb.com/articles/2009/05/11/Roberto-Orci-and-Alex-Kurtzman-on-Shatner-Sequels-and-Fan-Feedback.shtml]
So I don't think the writers even know where they are going with this yet.
In short: let's all sit back and see how it develops.
Galen:
I understand where you are coming from, too, in your thinking, but this isn't Back to the Future. I guess we have to remember that time travel and alternate realities theories aren't proven, so what BTTF used theory-wise is different from what this Star Trek film used.
Evidence exists in Star Trek of both closed (where the time line is repaired) and open (where a new timeline exists next to the old timeline) alternate realities. Wikipedia calls this "parallel universe", defining it as: "Parallel universe or alternative reality is a self-contained separate reality coexisting with one's own."
This new Star Trek universe is NOT meant to replace the original universe, i.e. all that canon is NOT wiped out. If you want more evidence of this, here is just a small fraction of the information you can find on the Internet.
On Memory Alpha (the Star Trek wikipedia), the Alternate reality article states:
"The alternate [Star Trek] reality is an alternate timeline forked from the prime reality sometime during 2233.
"...The emergence of the future ships caused the fork in time, and created the alternate reality." [http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Alternate_reality]
The key word here is "fork". If you visualize a fork, it has more than one prong. So while the original timeline we all know and love might be the first prong, the second prong is the new Star Trek film.
Also, in the "Star Trek (film)" article: "In the year 2233, ...a massive vessel — the Narada — emerges [from a black hole], creating an alternate timeline."
To show I'm not under a mistaken impression about this Star Trek film, another site (popculturezoo.com) has author Joseph Dillworth, Jr. state: "The great thing about this new alternate universe is that new stories can be told without being beholden to over forty years of continuity. At the same time, since this is an alternate timeline, all the adventures that we know and love so well have still and will still occur. Nothing invalidates them and they can be watched or read anytime."
An interview with Roberto Orci, one of the writers of this latest film, states in an interview:
"Orci: Rather than stick to the familiar Einsteinian approach, our story is inspired by more current thinking in theoretical physics."
"Q: You're referring to the increasingly popular "many worlds" theory about the possible structure of the space-time continuum."
"Orci: Exactly, and we chose that approach not only because it's the most up-to-date speculation about time travel, but in terms of telling a time-travel story it inherently preserves the established events of "Star Trek" in an alternate reality, and that allows breathing room between those stories and what we're doing now. It's also really fun for us, as writers, because "Star Trek" got us into science and now science is helping us to preserve "Star Trek," which is pretty amazing when you think about it."
So the writer even admits that the original timeline has NOT been replaced or destroyed. From the horse's mouth.
Funny story
Okay, hopefully this lightens up the mood a bit.
SPOILERS
In the movie, as we know, Nero captures Pike and straps him to the table thingy, trying to get him to answer some questions. Pike won't talk. During this very tense scene in which (in our theatre anyway) you could hear a pin drop, Noel leaned to me and whispered really low, "Let's play a game, Pike. One beep means yes, two means no." Well, I lost it. I was laughing so hard I was crying. (Not super loud mind you because I'm good like that.) But the fat chick in the Voyager jacket behind me got shitty.
Which, hey, considering we paid $16 a ticket each to see it, yeah, but it was funny to me at least.
Okay... time for dinner! :)
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Galen4
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
Hi Scott,
Interesting points from the writer, thanks for sharing.
It’s also a little bizarre.
Trek time travel laws are set up just as I described in my last post. There are numerous examples of this in every series. We have “City on the edge of forever”, “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, “Year of Hell,” too say nothing of “First Contact.”
I’ll let you in on a secret: I don’t care much for this take on time travel, but it’s what Trek operates by. It states that if a traveler goes backward and makes a change, he or she alters or even erases the traveler’s native reality. We have tons of canonical evidence to support the idea.
Current thinking in the real world is different. It seems unlikely that you can visit your own past…however, there’s mounting support for the idea that all versions of reality exist. Thus, even if you could travel backward, you would be visiting a parallel reality…a place whose history already contains your visit and any influences you made. It also eliminates the need to confront paradoxes. (David Deutsch presents a pretty solid case for this in his book “The fabric of reality”).
Here’s an amusing irony: They’re violating established Trek canon that governs time travel in order to preserve Trek canon.
Unless…the black hole wasn’t just a time machine but put them in a different universe. That would work. But I didn’t hear anything in the film to suggest a difference. I’ll watch it again and see if any hints were dropped.
Not that I’ll argue the point. As I sat in the theatre watching Kirk get chased by a Star Wars monster, as I began to realize no attempt was being made to adhere to Trek technology or even basic science-----I comforted myself by imagining the whole endeavor was set in a different reality.
If the writers want to go that way, they have my whole-hearted approval.
BTW, great Pike joke. I would have lost it too….
Maybe we should make the “fat chick in the Voyager jacket” into an icon. Kind of like Joe the Plumber?
My next post will be a list of things I liked about the movie…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
anova
|
Hi, guys :) I hope it's not rude to butt in, but I thought I could offer you all a different sort of perspective.
I saw the movie on opening day with a friend. I loved it so much that I convinced 2 other friends to see it with me again a few days later. The movie was even better when viewed for the second time, so I am currently looking for friends to accompany me on my third trip. I'd say that Star Trek 2009 is probably my second-favorite movie of all time.
I am a college-educated, 24-year-old woman with no prior exposure to Star Trek and very limited exposure to sci-fi in general. A week ago, I could not have cared less about Vulcans or the Enterprise or the Kobiyashi Maru scenario. How things have changed! I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to call myself a trekkie/trekker yet, but I have studied the wikipedia articles and googled the next/nearest Star Trek conventions and I am posting to the Trek Writer's Guild message board, so I'd say I'm off to a promising start.
I think the new Star Trek movie is for people like me. For example, I LOVED seeing Capt. Kirk and Spock growing up. Think about the difference between the friends you grow up with and the friends you make in college -- your college friends can get to know you, but the friends you grew up with know WHY you are that way. The backstory made it easy for me to care about the characters. I felt invested in them and wanted the best for them. Without that backstory, I probably would have disliked Kirk and felt indifferent toward the rest. I also loved how they portrayed young Spock's reaction to his personal tragedy. I look forward to watching the original series for the first time and comparing that universe's Spock with the Spock whose human tendencies are his last connection to his mother.
I know that Star Trek is already a huge phenomenon that doesn't need more fans, but I think that you will see a lot of eager new faces at your next convention. I'm guessing that a lot of those faces will be young and female. Even if you are disgusted with the new movie, I hope that you still welcome all of us who were brought to fandom by the movie :)
Now I'm off to read some stories....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kyle1701
( author )
Captain
Space. Endless, Simply Endless...
|
Heh... Archer's Beagle...
Now my thoughts.
1. Loved who they cast as Pike
2. Did a good job with the characters
3. Uhuru/Spock relationship... um wtf? Seriously... W T F? Let's hope he doesn't end up going all emotional like that tramp on Enterprise did, of course her's was due to overdosing on Trellium D... or whatever that was.... and off topic (oops).
4. So... Spock gave up on his world... erm okay... have another fight with Dad? Oh wait, his dad's dead so that can't be the reason. I agree with the above, Spock would go through life and limb to restore the timeline. He wouldn't just go "Oh, hey... everyone's dead. Sure it's not my universe... hmmm oh well, ooo look a new planet to put them on!" His logic is flawed, perhaps a result of ... oh who am I kidding... it's how the dang thing was written. However, I do like the idea that he was possibly still on Romulus since... well whenever he was there in Unification on TNG.
5. Alternate Universe... interesting idea. I've done lots of crap in an Alternate Universe with story writing myself. I suppose we'll just have to deal with the actual timeline being left with Romulus being destroyed and Spock disappearing from history? Hmmm, I'll have to think that one through some more.
6. Special effects rocked... the Nacelles on the Enterprise are a tad strange... but whatever. So nice and shiney. Anyone know what kind of ship the Kelvin was?
7. Orion Slave Girl/Cadet, nuff said.
8. Will I accept it as cannon... not really, how can you? It's in an alternate universe. You can't accept everything written in an alternate universe as cannon, if you were to do that... oh so confusing if they ever do update the Encyclopedia or Chronology. How would the entries start off (In an alternate reality... blah blah blah etc.)
9. Stardates... is it just me or are they doing the year dot something? Hmmm they might make some sense now.
10. I had some flashbacks (no not drug related), to Nemesis... I kept thinking to myself "What in the world is Picard's Cloan's ship doing there?" I mean I KNOW it wasn't his ship... but I dunno... perhaps too soon of a romulan movie after the last one. A Klingon movie would have been neat... wonder if they'll have smooth foreheads or not.
11. It was a tad strange. "Eh, we know you're cadets... hers's a ship... you're promoted to whatever we need you to be 'cause everyone else who's important is out doing what they need to do on the ships they need to be on."
12. So... let me get this straight. By Nero apparing when he did, and killing Kirk's dad... the Enterprise was built in Iowa? Iowa??? Wasn't that supposed to have been built in/around San Francisco? (I'm a bit fuzzy on this aspect of the original history... if anyone can clarify... please do.)
13. Speaking of Nero and his appearing changing the timeline. Wow, that sure messed with a lot of people's lives. Who knew, that by his doing what he did. Spock and Uhuru would hook up (gag), and the entire universe would be turned upside down, including Pavel Checkov being on the Enterprise during her madain voyage. Well when you mess with the timeline stuff happens eh?
I'm sure there's more... as a bottom line... I neither enjoyed or hated it. It was just there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Code Name D
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
Actually, the missiles from Nero's ship reminded me an offal lot like the missiles from Sarisi's ship in Galaxy Quest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Galen4
( author )
( series )
Commander
|
The Enterprise shouldn't have been built anywhere on Earth. The whole idea is idiotic.
A ship of that size, with its awkward hull design, a ship that is not capable of landing, would have been assembled in space. At least the main hull units would have been put together in space.
Only one of the many grating scenes in this movie.
Along with Kirk sitting on his motorcycle watching it get built. (Officer and a gentleman, anyone?) More out of place contemporary scenes in the 23rd Century. I suppose it goes well with kid Kirk racing a hotrod down the road, with rock music blaring over the speakers.
And here I was worried that Trek was getting dumbed down.
Silly me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Once you have their money... you never give it back.
#1 Ferengi Rules of Acquisition
|
|
|
Established March 1997, Trek Writer's Guild is a forum/index website for aspiring authors writing fan fiction in the Star Trek universe. This website is a collaboration between the many TWG/SotF authors and Mediaboy Productions. All stories are original and copyrighted by the respective authors under United States law, as well as every other country that matters. (Including Canada) All graphics are original and copyrighted, either separately or collaborativly, by Mediaboy Productions and/or others as specified. The stories and graphics on this site may not be copied, reprinted, or reposted without express and written permission of the original creators. Trek Writer's Guild is in no way affiliated with Paramount Pictures Inc. Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager, their respective characters, settings, and stories are property and copyright of Paramount Pictures Inc. These properties are used in good faith by the authors of Trek Writer's Guild, to further the human adventure through positive storytelling.